News

Following a discussion on the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling hosted by the George Washington University Federalist Society, the Student Bar Association and law school dean sent emails condemning the invited speaker from the Alliance Defending Freedom.

“ADF is classified as an anti-LGBT hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center," GWU Student Bar Association President Ali Kingston said in an email, a copy of which Campus Reform obtained. "ADF has supported the recriminalization of homosexuality in the U.S., works to develop ‘religious liberty’ legislation and case law that will allow the denial of goods and services to LGBT people, and is continuously working to overturn marriage equality and remove other protections in place for members of the LGBTQIA+ community."

The claims made against ADF in the email appear to be copied directly from the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is an American nonprofit legal advocacy organization specializing in civil rights and public interest litigation. The SPLC has been criticized in the past for labeling conservative or Christian groups as "hate groups" for ideological reasons.

“The Student Bar Association condemns homophobic, biphobic, or transphobic hate speech that leads members of this community to feel unsafe or uncomfortable at our school," Kingston continued. "We urge students to keep in mind which groups they choose to give a platform to and recognize their roles in fostering a sense of inclusivity and mutual respect in our community."

GWU law school Dean Blake D. Morant sent an email similar to the Student Bar Association.

[RELATED: Students accused of 'hatred' for defending traditional marriage]

“Following the events surrounding last week’s student-run programs on the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, I would like to take

Holy Cross cancels classes for sensitivity summit

The College of the Holy Cross canceled classes Friday afternoon at the College of the Holy Cross in response to an alleged anti-gay assault that occurred on campus.

The alleged hate crime was reported in the early hours of Oct. 27, but the college has refused to release any other details regarding the incident, the Worcester Telegram reported. The sexes of both the alleged perpetrator and victim are unknown, as well as if the victim was injured.

Holy Cross campus police did not file any formal charges or make any arrests, according to the Worcester District Attorney’s Office. A Worcester police spokesman said that neither he nor the Special Crimes unit, which deals with hate crimes, had received notification of the alleged hate crime.

The incident sparked an outcry on campus, resulting in the drafting and signing of a letter by more than 1,000 students and faculty members to the president of the college, Rev. Philip Boroughs.

“The damage caused by acts of bias-motivated hate and violence is tremendous,” a portion of the letter reads. “There is a perception that the college as an institution embraces a culture of silence around many such events, and that when communication does occur, it is too often both minimal in content and insubstantial in action.”

Student and faculty signatories of the letter suggested canceling class for up to one week and recommended that the school hold “teach-ins, vigils, [and] community conversations” in the letter delivered to Boroughs on Nov. 8.

The next day, the Holy Cross president announced that classes would be canceled on the afternoon of Nov. 16 and that a “sensitivity” summit would be held in lieu of classes. Holy Cross intended for the summit, titled the ENGAGE Summit, to be a talk on “respect and inclusion” and creating a campus “community that supports and celebrates all its members.”

[RELATED: Yale hosts workshop teaching sensitivity to bestiality]

Participation in the summit was voluntary, but some events resulted in crowded rooms, leaving some students to sit on the floor in order to participate, according to The Spire. Three workshop se

The University of Michigan student government mandated earlier in November that its representatives attend events held by “Students of Color” (SOC) organizations.

UMich’s student government passed Assembly Resolution 8-023, titled “A Resolution to Mandate Representative Attendance at Students of Color (SOC) organization events” with a vote of 25-2 and three abstentions.

Student government representatives will now have to attend one SOC organization event per month of the academic year, beginning in November, citing a “depressed voice for students of color” due to a majority of the student government’s reps being white, as well as the “exclusion, microaggressions, and hate crimes” currently faced by UMich students of color.

“This resolution…strives to serve the needs of these minority students,” UMich student Rep. Mario Galindez, who voted in favor of the resolution, told Campus Reform. Galindez accused the student government of “neglect[ing] [SOC] in favor of a rich white majority.”

The mandate “[will] ensure that representatives create and vote for resolutions that will benefit, and not disadvantage their student body,” the proposal suggested. “Representatives must understand the cultural and social society if every student, especially SOC.”

The once per month attendance requirement is less than the originally proposed requirement of six events per semester, Galindez shared with Campus Reform.

“There was concern that mandatory monthly attendance...would constitute too much of a time commitment,” Galindez added. He said that “on campus, racial tensions are often a bit overstated,” but also noted that racial tensions are “always worse for African Americans.”

The six groups that CSG Representatives are mandated to attend are Black Student Union, La Casa, United Asian American Associations, South Asian Awareness Network, Arab Student Association, and the Native American Student Association, as stated in

Rutgers reverses punishment for aposI now hate white peopleapos prof

Rutgers University reversed its decision to sanction a professor who said "I now hate white people" in a June Facebook post.

The school's Office of Employment Equity originally found Rutgers history professor James Livingston guilty of violating Rutgers' discrimination and harassment policy, but went back on its decision in November, according to NorthJersey.com.

"OK, officially, I now hate white people," Livingston had posted on Twitter. "I am a white people [sic], for God's sake, but can we keep them -- us -- us out of my neighborhood?" The professor reported that a restaurant he visited for dinner was "overrun with little Caucasian assholes who know their parents will approve of anything they do."

"Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you unlikely moron," Livingston continued. "Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white. I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know it's about access to my dinner. Fuck you, too."

Rutgers’ policy states that they “strictly prohibit discrimination and harassment based on membership in certain enumerated protected classes. ” and one of “these class[es are] race." Rutgers spokesperson Dory Delvin said that discriminatory remarks do not count as the freedom faculty and staff have at Rutgers University.

The Office of Employment Equity began conducting an investigation and found that the Professor's comments inflicted damage on the University’s reputation and thus fell outside of First Amendment protections, according to The Daily Targum.

"Given Professor Livingston’s insistence on making disparaging racial comments, a reasonable student may have concerns that he or she would be stigmatized in his classes because of his or her race," the school stated.

Professor Livingston stated in response that the Office of Employment Equity at Rutgers “found me guilty of 'reverse racism,' whatever that is."

On Aug. 8, Professor Livingston appealed Rutgers’ investigation and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) picked up his cases. On Nov. 14, after FIRE contacted to Rutg

Students bark in protest to save the trees

Western Michigan University students marched in protest against the removal of trees on their campus.

More than 60 WMU students gathered to protest the university’s removal of 58 trees in order to put a new residence hall and student center in their place, as reported by MLive. According to a poster for the event, the “Save the Trees Student Initiative” was hosted by the Students for a Sustainable Earth and the Western Michigan Biology Club.

Many students held signs, which included slogans like "cut a tree, cut a life," "teach peace," and "we speak for the trees," while chanting "save a tree, save a life," as shown in a video posted on Mlive’s YouTube channel.

“Join us for a march to denounce the plans to cut down 50+ trees near the Ernest Burnham Building on WMU's campus," the event’s Facebook page read.

“Come out and tell WMU that we, students, do care about our green spaces on campus!”

The student group also shared a Change.org petition, started by Abbie Bristol, a WMU student in the group, opposing the university’s actions on its Facebook page.

“We believe in the intrinsic value of these trees as beautiful, living components of the campus landscape, and the ecosystem services these trees offer: carbon sequestration, stormwater management, and islands of habitat for wildlife on campus,” the description says.

The petition also requests a public polling for the design plan of the new buildings and wants the polling to include a new plan that would work around the trees.

“We, concerned students, feel the university doesn't understand what these trees really mean,” Bristol told Campus Reform, “The importance and urgency of climate change is [sic] not high enough on the administration's list of priorities.”

“This is made clear by the removal of a hillside of mature, productive trees to be replaced